Steel Armour v. Arrows (A Request To Stephen Selby)

osmiu · Post by **osmiu** » Thu Sep 02, 2010 2:54 pm

Adam wrote:I do not believe arrows could penetrate armour from a greater distance however.

What else killed thousands of french knights ?

Stephen Selby · Post by **Stephen Selby** » Fri Sep 03, 2010 6:15 am

osmiu wrote:
Adam wrote:I do not believe arrows could penetrate armour from a greater distance however.
What else killed thousands of french knights ?

Panic among their horses, which threw the riders to the ground where they could have their throats cut as they couldn't get away.

Adam Karpowicz · Post by **Adam Karpowicz** » Fri Sep 03, 2010 9:22 am

Right, the horses were the favourite target. Then there was mud and the lack of organization (Agincourt).....

Adam

Lord Ruthven · Post by **Lord Ruthven** » Fri Sep 03, 2010 11:39 am

They couldn't get away ? Why?
Most of them were massacred because of the chaos, panic, total lack of tactics and organisation and because the English archers joined the mele with maces and daggers.

Bede · Post by **Bede** » Sat Sep 04, 2010 2:35 am

Adam has accurately pointed out that we are talking about two different things: winning battles and penetrating armour.

I don't think that the point I raised about late Timurid armies is appropriate for this particular discussion and may have pushed it off its proper track. Undoubtedly, Babur had some phenomenal archers in his retinue. This is another indication of the presence heavy bows in battle.